Percentage's Even Chance System

[Horsewill]

In my opinion the best way to play even chances is with a positive progression aiming for a short run of 3 or 4 of the same even chance hitting in a row to put you in profit.  Anyone else play even chances in a similar way?

[gizmotron]

In my opinion the best way to play even chances is with a positive progression aiming for a short run of 3 or 4 of the same even chance hitting in a row to put you in profit.  Anyone else play even chances in a similar way?

I do if the conditions are massive in the way of suggesting doing it. I use 2-1-2 where three net wins is enough to make you a millionaire. You do know that trick don't you?

[Horsewill]

I don't know that one! I don't get out much.  Please share if you would...

[Rinad]

   I think going for short runs in definitely the way to go with even bets . playing positive progressions will also keep yourself under control because you force yourself to go down when losing.
I think it is the most under-rated way to play ec's and most players that I have meet that wins consistently have been doing some type of positive progressions, and also move up to a higher base after so many losing trials, but patience is the key there.
I have known new players winning thousands of dollars year after year doing it with baccarat, and did only that.
one can use a divider after so many losses and get his money back never going for more then 4 in a row, if that.
I highly recommend it for any players. works great on dozens as well.

Rinad

[gizmotron]

I don't know that one! I don't get out much.  Please share if you would...

opps, I meant to answer this.

I got flat out drunk and hammered the guitar instead. I aspire to discover that range between Billy Gibbons and  Stevie Ray Vaughan being that I come from Michael Bloomfield, Muddy Waters, Led Zeppelin, and Robert Johnson.  I'm a real renaissance man. I am an original guitarist. It's really incredible --- just that much. So I know, being probably the first poly extreme athlete, that do or die s***, I am different when it comes to rating anything. I can't hold anyone to my standards. It makes zero sense. But I love perusing excellence in gambling.  It's an extreme ground to perfect you intellect with. I want it badly. I have no idea how badly other want it. I'm 67 years old and all the great scary things are over. I will produce a volume of music and I will master this gambling thing.

That's really me drunk, -- ha ha.

---- oh ya, that answer....

[gizmotron]

I think going for short runs in definitely ...

 I get that. But I would stretch to biggest pictures.

You can't go to the dog track and get excited about winning. It means absolutely nothing because "Good Will Hunting" is on tonight and all things equates to that and "Rounders."  I know why s*** works.

[Sputnik]

I attach the statistics for reversals:
From

Philip Koetsch book.

Cheers

[Sputnik]

Here is more statistics from hes flat betting sample with 600 x 100 trails samples.

1) what are the absolute worst and best things that could theoretically happen?
2) what were the worst and best things that actually did happen in 600 rounds?
3) what were the average worst and best things that did happen?
4) what typically happens if you don't get out while your ahead , but instead play the full round of 100 games?
5) during a round, how often can you expect to get ahead by at least 10, 20 or 30 chips?
6) in a 100 game round, how many times does your bankroll net-status typically reverse from losing to winning?
7) how often does this net-status never reverse but remains losing throughout a 100 game round?

[Mike]

Are you denying that in previous posts in this forum you claimed that past spins were irrelevant ?

Past numbers are irrelevant for future numbers (meaning that past doesn't affect future) but past numbers can be used to determine the distribution of outcomes. How else could you determine it?

[scepticus]

Exactly my point Mike.
Where is the point of  determining the distribution of outcomes if  they are irrelevant in determining WHAT to bet on future spins ?  Any thing determined applies ONLY to the distribution of the data used but NOT to future spins .
That said . I think you  will  have made a useful  contribution to the forum if you would now show us how you determine which is LIKELY to be correct. Incidentally, I think Bayes- in another forum- found that Hot numbers had the edge over cold numbers . 

From one troll to another     what do you think of the Brexit saga now ?
 

[Mike]

Where is the point of  determining the distribution of outcomes if  they are irrelevant in determining WHAT to bet on future spins ?  Any thing determined applies ONLY to the distribution of the data used but NOT to future spins .

Finding the distribution could be useful, if only because it might tell you that the outcomes are biased. Why would you ASSUME that past outcomes won't tell you what to bet in the future?

There is a difference between biased outcomes and independent outcomes, and they're not mutually exclusive. Bias has to do with the distribution, but triggers are about independence (and trigges don't work because outcomes are independent). System players often get confused and don't seem to understand the difference. If you understood the difference you wouldn't have asked this question.

You don't need past numbers to tell you that spins are independent, you should just use logic and the fact the number of pockets doesn't change between spins, but if you don't believe this, you can use past numbers to show that outcomes ARE independent. System players use past numbers all the time when testing systems don't they? And what the testing shows is that triggers don't work.

Hot numbers DO have the edge over cold numbers, but only to the extent that the numbers are biased. On a random wheel it makes no difference. It's NEVER a good idea to bet that cold numbers will catch up.

[Third]

Triggers are at least good for consistency of bet selection for statistical purposes.  A person doesn't need cold numbers to "catch up" to profit from them but I am not the guy who will bet them except for testing purposes to prove that they too can be profitable.

[scepticus]

“ Why would I ASSUME that past outcomes won’t tell you what to bet in the future “ ? 

 Because . as you agree Mike . Past numbers don’t affect the future numbers .

Biased numbers and independent numbers are NOT mutually excusive ? What is your justification for that statement ?

Where did I say that numbers were NOT independent ?

Where did I say that I  used past numbers for testing ?

[Mike]

Biased numbers and independent numbers are NOT mutually excusive ? What is your justification for that statement ?

If you find that a wheel is biased you bet on the biased numbers, that's it. There's no waiting for triggers, no hit and run, you just bet on the biased numbers for as long as the bias exists (I'm talking about genuine bias not just normal variance). There is no trigger involved unless you count identifying the bias as a "trigger", but it's not a trigger in the usual sense that a system player uses the term.
 If outcomes are dependent it means that there is some regular pattern or sequence which "triggers" another pattern or sequence. If outcomes are independent there is no pattern which triggers or influences other patterns, which is why triggers don't work in roulette, although many system players believe they do, so you see them starting to bet when some numbers are hot because they think that this will somehow make them stay hot. 

Why should outcomes be dependent? The only example I can think of would be if the casino was cheating you. Say for example you were using a positive martingale on red. After a few wins the casino might turn on magnets which deflected the ball away from red, so the trigger would be to start betting black after a few reds in a row. This would work if you knew what the casino was doing.
But this is a pretty far-fetched scenario and we can assume that 99.999% of the time the outcomes are independent. But some numbers could be biased. Biased doesn't mean dependent. Even though some numbers have a greater chance of hitting than other numbers it doesn't mean that just because the numbers haven't hit in a while it means they are "due"; that's still gambler's fallacy.

[medardo]

UUU, many replay on my thread.

Anybody try to play what I describe in first post?

I play on evolution Gaming, maybe somebody try it on some
other platform with same stats, it must be 50 numbers stats,
I relaize that to see in 100 spins 70-30 % in even chances is hard.

So, try it with small bankroll and let me know. That is meaning of
why I start topic on the first place.

Good luck.